10.7910/DVN/JXCCBJ Gidron, Noam Noam Gidron https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0217-1204 Hebrew University Margalit, Yotam Yotam Margalit https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9589-8487 Tel-Aviv Univeristy Sheffer, Lior Lior Sheffer https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4049-7299 Tel-Aviv Univeristy Yakir, Itamar Itamar Yakir https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9476-6589 Yale University Harvard Dataverse 2025 Social Sciences Democratic backsliding, Affective polarization, Personalism Yakir, Itamar Itamar Yakir Yale University Yakir, Itamar Itamar Yakir Yale University 2024-07-06 2025-02-12 146 6159 59127 5075 90039 861218 16655 15232 36699 106579 276889 6219 text/tab-separated-values type/x-r-syntax application/x-stata-syntax type/x-r-syntax application/pdf text/tab-separated-values text/tab-separated-values text/tab-separated-values text/tab-separated-values application/pdf application/pdf text/plain 1.0 Custom terms specific to this dataset Concerns over democratic backsliding have proliferated recently, as elected politicians have sought to undermine democratic checks and balances. This study examines the underpinnings of public support for democratic backsliding, delineating five theoretical accounts: personalistic leadership, affective polarization, populism, majoritarianism and entanglement with the law. We test the explanatory power of these accounts within the Israeli context, leveraging panel survey data collected before and after the government announced its plan to curtail the courts. Results suggest that support for the plan is strongly associated with dislike of partisan opponents and attachment to Prime Minister Netanyahu, and more weakly with a majoritarian understanding of democracy and negative experiences with the legal system. Populist attitudes are not associated with support for the government&apos;s plan. Our study advances research in the field by disentangling theoretical accounts regarding support for democratic backsliding and testing them with rich panel data that began before the onset of the overhaul drive. This dataset underwent an independent verification process, complying with the AJPS Verification Policy updated June 2023, which replicated the tables and figures in the primary article. For the supplementary materials, verification was performed solely for the successful execution of the code. The verification process was carried out by the Cornell Center for Social Sciences at Cornell University. <br></br> The associated article has been awarded the Open Materials Badge. Learn more about the Open Practice Badges from the <a href="https://www.cos.io/">Center for Open Science</a>. <br></br> <img src="https://socialsciences.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/2024-04/materials_large_color.png" alt="Open Materials Badge " width="60" height="60"> <br></br> Open Materials Badge